51Թ

UNDT/2024/014

UNDT/2024/014, N'Daw

UNAT Held or UNDT Pronouncements

Given the reputational risk inherent in any investigation, it was incumbent on the Applicant as a staff member applying for or occupying such a senior position as Head of the Country Office, to notify UNFPA of the allegations, suspension and investigation. Considering the negative publicity that such a situation inevitably generates in the media, UNFPA would have been justified in questioning the Applicant’s suitability as a staff member in general and for the position of Country Representative in particular.

Accordingly, the Tribunal found that the facts anterior in this case were directly relevant to an assessment of the Applicant’s suitability for the post of Country Representative and that they should have precluded her appointment to the post had they been known to UNFPA during the hiring process or prior to the appointment.

Decision Contested or Judgment/Order Appealed

The Applicant is a former staff member of the United Nations Population Fund (“UNFPA”). On 2 June 2022, she filed an application contesting the decision to terminate her appointment for facts anterior to the appointment.

Legal Principle(s)

The Tribunal recalls that pursuant to art. 101.3 of the Charter of the United Nations, which is the instrument at the top of the Organization’s internal legal system, integrity is one of the paramount considerations that should be taken into account in the recruitment of United Nations staff.

Further, pursuant to staff regulation 1.2(b), “[s]taff members shall uphold the highest standards of efficiency, competence and integrity. The concept of integrity includes, but is not limited to, probity, impartiality, fairness, honesty and truthfulness in all matters affecting their work and status”.

Moreover, the Appeals Tribunal has repeatedly affirmed that staff members are presumed to know the regulations and rules applicable to them and that ignorance of the law cannot be used as an excuse for not respecting such regulations and rules.

Outcome
Dismissed on merits
Outcome Extra Text

The Tribunal also finds that the Applicant’s request to be awarded compensation for moral harm stands to be rejected because the Applicant has not adduced any valid evidence of harm.

OAJ prepared this case law summary for informational purposes only. It is no official record and should not be relied upon as an authoritative interpretation of the Tribunals' rulings. For the authoritative texts, please refer to the judgment or order rendered by the respective Tribunal. The Tribunals are the only bodies competent to interpret their respective judgments, as provided under Article 12(3) of the UNDT Statute and Article 11(3) of the UNAT Statute. Any inaccuracies in the publication are the sole responsibility of OAJ, which should be contacted directly for any correction requests. To provide comments, don't hesitate to get in touch with OAJ at oaj@un.org.

The judgment summaries were generally prepared in English. They were translated into French and are being reviewed for accuracy of the translation.

Applicants/Appellants
N'Daw
Entity
Case Number(s)
Tribunal
Registry
Date of Judgement
Judge(s)
Language of Judgment
Issuance Type